Use of word "Mythological" or "Myth" for

Printable View

12th February 2005, 02:20 PM
torchbearer

Use of word "Mythological" or "Myth" for

Hi!

This is a very General, Straightforward and simple thread.

Not only westerners also many indians and and that too many hindu culture followers use word "Myth" for Hindu culture/tradition/shastras/Puranas.

According to Oxford Dictionary one of the meaning of "myth" is fictitious person or thing or idea"

meaning of "fictitious" according to Oxford Dictionary is counterfiet, not genuine, unreal and imaginary"

This definition can never be applied to Hindu Culture because Hindu Shastras are based on Facts and not fiction.

What has occured thousands of years ago or what has been written thousands of years ago just cannot be regarded as fiction simply because we don't have any proof of that.

Stories in Puranas and shastras are real and have been written down by our enlightened Sages thousands or years ago because they have happened in connection with spiritual matter, and just reading or hearing those puranas one gets on to straight path of Dharma, Arth, kama and Moksha.

What incidents are happening now are real and also they are true after thousands of years.

The pity is even Hindus call Hindu Culture a myth out of sheer IGNORANCE

So we are calling our culture sacred and in the same breath we call it as unreal.

Bye
13th February 2005, 01:51 AM
aravindhan

Re: Use of word "Mythological" or "Myth"
Quote:

Originally Posted by torchbearer

This definition can never be applied to Hindu Culture because Hindu Shastras are based on Facts and not fiction.

The majority of Hindus will not agree with you, I think. Consider the following:
- -> Do you believe that solar eclipses occur because a disembodied head swallows the sun, and they end when the sun emerges from the head's severed gullet? Or do you believe that they occur because the moon blocks us from seeing the sun?
- -> Do you believe that the Milky Way in the sky is actually a large ocean of milk that's floating up there, or do you believe that it is a collection of stars?
In both these cases I believe the latter, and I will therefore call the former a myth. The Puranas sought to express the theology of bhakti in a form that would be easy to understand and implement. They did not seek to record literal truths, and I do not see why Hindus should believe that they do.
14th February 2005, 01:23 PM
Sandeep

Hindu mythologies are literary works and not historial data.

The story writers of this mythology may have been influenced by historic events.

For instance Ramayana. There may have been a truthfull prince called Rama who defeated Ravana. Ramanaya is a story written by Valmiki based on this incident. Naturally like our movies exageration of events is all too natural (Remember special effects in Ramananda Sagars TV version of Ramayana.)
15th February 2005, 03:48 PM
torchbearer

The majority of Hindus will not agree with you

You are absolutely wrong sandeep. you have said just the opposite.

In fact stars planets and other heavenly bodies u see in the sky are just symbolic in nature. the real dieties of the planets are beyond the realm of human understanding which can be understood only by experiencing it and not by seeing through microscope or reading some science journals.
15th February 2005, 04:40 PM
Sandeep

Quote:

Originally Posted by torchbearer

The majority of Hindus will not agree with you

You are absolutely wrong sandeep. you have said just the opposite.

That was not my statement that you have quoted.
15th February 2005, 05:39 PM
torchbearer

hello

sorry sandeep that that was for aravindham

Hindu mythologies are literary works and not historial data.

sandeep, Ramayan was written long before it actually took place.

Though they are literary works they are spiritual works, and holds messages and enlightment for mankind.
15th February 2005, 09:21 PM
pradheep

mis-understanding

ithishasa and puranam are two different aspects. Ithihasa is history and puranam is ancient knowledge. Puranam is knowledge about the mystery of life and cosmos. Since the mystery cannot be easily understood it was simplified in the form of stories for us to understand. Ramayan and mahabhrat are historical facts which was blended with puranas for both history facts and aesthetic sense.
5th April 2005, 05:40 PM
F.S.Gandhi vandayar

The use of word myth

Hindu(Indu) religion has two aspects in its definition.

One is occulstic nature of world explaining. The other one is practical/scientific world explaining.

Occultic propogations are Astrology,Palmistry,Numerology,Karma ideology etc. We can't get result for the doings in scientific ways.
But we can get results. These are called myths.

Scinetific Propogations are mathematics,Medicine etc.

There is one extremity in every religion. That means myth will be rigid never accepting scientific inventions. That time myth seems to be foolish activity.

But at the sametime certain myths will proove results.

for example, Mr. Ramanujam ,a great mathematician, calculated additions and substractions very easily without applying normal geometrical rule which was formed in him intuitionally. This will give you a definite example for astrology.

During the vedic period they calculated the distance between sun and earth accurately. Now by copernicas theorem the same distance was obtained. Aryabata invented Algebra intuitionally. The formulas now used in scientific geometrical laws.

We should strike a balance between the so called myths and science. That will be beneficial to human society.

We should not be a puranas believers always and at the same time we should not ask scietific proof for everything.
25th November 2005, 08:09 AM
asitaraman

Re: Use of word "Mythological" or "Myth"
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravindhan

Quote:

Originally Posted by torchbearer

This definition can never be applied to Hindu Culture because Hindu Shastras are based on Facts and not fiction.

The majority of Hindus will not agree with you, I think. Consider the following:

-> Do you believe that solar eclipses occur because a disembodied head swallows the sun, and they end when the sun emerges from the head's severed gullet? Or do you believe that they occur because the moon blocks us from seeing the sun?

-> Do you believe that the Milky Way in the sky is actually a large ocean of milk that's floating up there, or do you believe that it is a collection of stars?

In both these cases I believe the latter, and I will therefore call the former a myth. The Puranas sought to express the theology of bhakti in a form that would be easy to understand and implement. They did not seek to record literal truths, and I do not see why Hindus should believe that they do.
Remember that languages change over time and that our current interpretation of what was said before may not be right. Also, there are certain "Ghanas" that were used to code writings. Hence, if you do not know the right "Ghana" then you will get the wrong answer. Sort of like a checksum mechanism in networking.

Having said that not all that was said was necessarily right nor wrong. They were observations or knowledge at that particular point of time. Fpr example, if you were to compute the life cycles of the fourt Yugas and the life of Brahma, it would roughly correspond to the total life of this cosmos as we know it today! To say that these were exaggerations or to dismiss them out-of-hand is not the right approach.

We do not have enough understanding of what was said then nor do we have enough understanding of what is being said today. Since science is by definition a process of inquiry, why are we not inquiring? As George Bernard Shaw said, "the only thing that we know for certain is what we do not know today."

Rgds, Aravind Sitaraman
25th November 2005, 08:14 AM
asitaraman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandeep

Hindu mythologies are literary works and not historial data.

The story writers of this mythology may have been influenced by historic events.

For instance Ramayana. There may have been a truthfull prince called Rama who defeated Ravana. Ramanaya is a story written by Valmiki based on this incident. Naturally like our movies exageration of events is all too natural (Remember special effects in Ramananda Sagars TV version of Ramayana.)

I do not agree only because we do not know one way or the other. We do not know whether Rama existed, we do not know that he did not exist. Ditto for Ravana, the Lanka campaign, etc.

How can you say with certainity that these were only literary works and not history? And, how can we argue the other way?

We need to have a process of inquiry to prove one way or the other. This is not to be confused with belief systems; in which case the process of enquiry does not really matter. So, let people believe what they do but let us not reject or accept ideas just because they do not conform to a or our belief system.

Rgds, Aravind Sitaraman
11th April 2006, 11:48 PM
Fire111999

Re: The use of word myth

Quote:

Originally Posted by F.S.Gandhi vandayar

During the vedic period they calculated the distance between sun and earth accurately. Now by copernicas theorem the same distance was obtained. Aryabata invented Algebra intuitionally. The formulas now used in scientific geometrical laws.

don't know if this is relevant here but i remembered this when i was reading the above.

the story of how ganesh's head is chopped off by his father shiva and then the elephant head is fixed onto him.

one could draw a parallel from this to today's world, as in how there was some talk of tranfering christopher reeve(superman)'s head to another body. so this kind of technology could possibly become possible in the real world. so there is a sort of link b/w these stories in hinduism and science.